At $100/$190, the only thunderbolt this will cause is the one hitting the wallet. All this for an interface with no tangible improvement over USB 3.0 for an external hard drive that's limited by the drive's speed.

I'm sure Mac owners will lap it up though as it's their only option as mandated by Apple.Reply

If you have a computer with Thunderbolt, USB 2.0 or Firewire, there mostly certainly is a "tangible improvement" with being able to use the Thunderbolt port. And if or when Seagate introduces an SSD drive with that's compatible with the Goflex adapters, the Thunderbolt adapter would easily provide the fastest pathway.

As for your Apple comment, it's not only inaccurate on its face - you can use USB 2.0 or Firewire on any Apple computer - but also irrelevant to this article. Always amazes me that some folks use even the most tangible stories as an opportunity to bash Apple.Reply

Oh, please. As if your and r3's comments weren't emotion-laden. You might want to try to say things that don't apply even more to yourselves than to the object of your derision. You know, the "speck in your brother's eye, log in your own eye" thing.

There's nothing wrong with being a fan as long as one doesn't get carried away to the point of no longer being rational. In this case, r3 made a valid point about Apple artificially limiting its customers' choices, for no apparent good reason. Is that somehow a good thing for Apple users? The "no support from Intel" reason given by Steve Jobs was clearly baloney: it's not hurting other manufacturers of computers and peripherals. There is plenty of inferior USB 3.0 product out there, and the acceptance rate reflects it, but one would think Apple would be able to develop superior designs.

@ddarko: what is the "most certain tangible improvement" that arises in the scenario that r3 postulated--which is different than the one you posed--using a Thunderbolt port rather than a USB 3.0 port? Isn't the inherent disk speed a limiting factor in that scenario, as r3 says? Even if Thunderbolt's throughput is greater, most users may not transfer two or three figures of GB often enough to feel that it justifies spending more for the interface than they spent on the hard drive itself.

You're right about GoFlex having a standard SATA interface, and people need to understand that. I have several USB 3.0 GoFlex adapters left over after buying FIreWire versions, and they work just fine for connecting bare SATA drives. There's no reason they couldn't be used--including in their Thunderbolt iteration, presumably--to connect SSDs (along with 2.5"-3.5" adapters as required, of course).Reply

The tangible improvement is that the scenario he has poses doesn't exist in the real world since almost all computers with Thunderbolts out there are Apple, which don't have USB 3.0. This product is chiefly for those users who will only have access to USB 2.0 or Firewire. That will change as non-Apple computers start to introduce Thunderbolt

It is a bit rich that on the one hand, he implicitly takes a swipe at Apple for not having USB 3.0, but on the other, dismisses a solution that offers those users a faster pathway. For Apple computers that don't have USB 3.0 but do have Thunderbolt - which is 100% of all Apple computers with Thunderbolt - this Seagate adapter will get you faster speeds right now.Reply

I would add, it's undeniable the Thunderbolt adapter's price is high but it's cheaper to buy the adapter plus a Goflex hard drive than buying a drive with a built-in Thunderbolt port. And there is added flexibility because you can use that Goflex hard drive with other computers that don't have Thunderbolt ports by swapping adapters.

I dismissed r3loaded's comment because it is oblivious to the reality of the market for this product. Folks who will consider this product don't have a choice to use USB 3.0 over Thunderbolt - the only alternatives they can turn to are USB 2.0 or Firewire. When Apple rolls out USB 3.0 with the Ivy Bridge chipsets, obviously, the calculation will be different. But this adapter is for the present Sandy Bridge-based computers with only USB 2.0 as an alternative to Thunderbolt.Reply

MacBook Air and Mac Mini don't have FireWire. So for those computers you really do need Thunderbolt drives, or you're stuck with USB 2.0.

It really is a shame that Apple doesn't (won't?) support USB 3.0; for magnetic drives r3loaded is right, there's no tangible difference between USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt except for the big price jump (both controller and cable).Reply

Some clarification of what you said helps. Yes, the Air and Mini neither have built-in Firewire but the combination of Thunderbolt and the Apple 27 inch monitor provide Firewire to both platforms. That's the key point when people start comparing USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt ... it's not a like-to-like comparison. There's nothing preventing the implementation of USB 3.0 over Thunderbolt. There is no possible way to implement Thunderbolt over USB.

In regards to Apple supporting USB 3.0, I suspect this has only been due to the lack of support in Intel's chipset. With USB 3.0 in Ivy Bridge, I'd be willing to bet that USB 3.0 will very likely appear on Apple machines. Reply

There seems to be some confusion about the Goflex docking system. It's not an enclosure that you stick a bare drive into. The Goflex system separate the interface port from the drive chassis. The drive itself has a universal SATA slot. You pick a Goflex dock with the port that you want - USB 2.0/3.0, Firewire, eSATA, Thunderbolt. - and plug your Goflex drive into it. Any drive that has a universal SATA slot is supposed to be compatible with the docks but I believe Seagate is still the only company that makes drives with the universal SATA slot. This announcement is the introduction of a docking station with Thunderbolt ports. Reply

I don't even bother using the case that came with my GoFlex USB 3.0 drive. I just use the connector part. Plug it into a bare SATA drive sitting on my desk, plug the other end into the computer. You can use the case if you want, but it's not necessary.Reply